Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dick Raper

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. bainer (talk) 10:11, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dick Raper

stub bio on non-notable person AdamJacobMuller 01:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Again. Moe ε 01:59, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: I recommend that {{deletedpage}} be applied to this page if it is reposted after this AfD. --TML1988 02:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. A google search doesn't turn up enough information to expand this bio beyond what already exists. Non-notable. --BWD ^(talk) 02:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, I google searched it and it pulled up one exact result for Dick Raper which the article is about. That one page is also an external link on the article. Moe ε 02:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and do as TML1988 suggested--inks^T 02:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete The CEO of Masterfoods is NOT someone named Dick Raper; the name is an inappropriate hoax, including male genitalia and the act of rape.
  • That is incorrect, you are lying. Clearly you have made an assertion without correctly researching the facts. I suggest you swiftly retract your lie. CEO DR 14:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Way outta here! Crzrussian 07:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, was it written by Mike Rotch? -- Samir (the scope) 07:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per excellent argument raised by Politepunk. I couldn't find the names of managers on the Mars Inc. website, though -- Samir (the scope) 08:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Dick Raper does appear to be CEO of Masterfoods [1] who imo are a notable company and are adjudged to be worthy of an article. I think that we should avoid making a judgement about this article on the basis of Mr Raper's name and try and make it on the basis of his notability for an article. I suspect that someone who is CEO of a company with a 14 billion USD turnover is of sufficient standing within the business world to merit an article. In view of the scatalogical and sexual nature of many of the episodes of vandalism that appear on Wikipedia it is perhaps natural that we should assume that the article is a hoax, but in this case it appears not to be the case. I agree that it does need to be expanded at some point, but I thought it was important that the consensus on this one should be challenged. Politepunk 08:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete I think that Thatcher131's research has now shown that he probably isn't (atm) sufficiently notable to warrant an article and I'm happy to change my vote accordingly. Other than his name, there is unlikely to be a good deal of public interest in him and thus he doesn't satisfy WP:BIO. (Tangentially: a case could be made that the WP:BIO criteria should be slightly expanded to include notable businesspeople.) Despite amending my vote I'm pleased that we considered the merits of Mr Raper's inclsion on the basis of his notability rather than on the basis of his name. Politepunk 08:55, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

• Comment I know we live in the internet age, but couldn't somebody (who is in the US) do something old fashioned like walk into a library and check this out? Or call whoever keeps corporate records in the USA? Mr Raper's name comes up top in a Google for "masterfoods ceo" but most results are old, I'd think the most likely answer is that he's former CEO. --kingboyk 09:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - I have access to Bloomberg People Directory. Mr Raper is indeed the current CEO of Masterfoods, and has been for the last several years, and prior to that had a successful career. This page shows the problem of consensus being deemed more important than knowledge of the matter. Just because someone doesn't come up in Google, doesn't mean they are not notable. Raper is interviewed in national magazines on a near-monthly basis, it's just that they don't reproduce all their articles onto Google. CEO DR 14:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Uhh.. reproduce all thier articles onto Google? Google is a search engine. If Dick Raper's name was that important and he was featured monthly in articles, he would probably get more than 1 google hit. Besides, there isn't enough information on Dick Raper to produce more than there already is. The only external link we have on him is from 2001. I suggest recreating the page when you have more information on him. Moe ε 15:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
      • By "reproduce" I meant there being an online version of the paper edition, eg reproduced online. Whilst newspapers may archive everything online, the business magazines Raper is featured in are more exclusive, like IFR magazine which costs $100 a copy, so obviously they won't put content up for free online. CEO DR 16:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
      • Relooked and he has 64 total as shown in a link above. But there still isn't enough information there to sustain an article. Moe ε 15:46, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
        • As I said above Moe, not everything is on the net. It's quite possible indeed that this guy is featured in who's who books and business magazines which are not archived on the net. It's very worrying if Wikipedia editors think no net presence = does not exist. One word: library. --kingboyk 05:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• keep notable, per above. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 15:38, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep notable as shown by politepunk. Bucketsofg 15:43, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per politepunk. However, this article is in serious need of expansion if anyone is going to take it seriously. The start of the article should use his proper name (I'm assuming Richard) as the article on Bill Gates (and many others) does. I think we need a good dose of WP:AGF on this one. --Cymsdale 15:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Delete per Thatcher131's comments below. I felt he barely deserved an article as a non-notable CEO. Now he's apparently a non-notable, mid-level executive. --Cymsdale 10:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. This guy appears to be notable only because of his name. It must be amusing to some to think "Hey, this guy really is named Dick Raper", but other than that, he's just another CEO. JIP | Talk 17:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Verified true, perhaps remove the last line, and expand on the rest.
  • Delete in light of recent info. --Irishpunktom\^talk 17:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - A search of Google proves Politepunk's point. While it is true that there is not enough information, perhaps it should instead be merged with Masterfoods until more information (perhaps from Mr. Raper (heheheheheh- sorry) himself) can be garnered. Also, obviously, the last line must be taken out.--Ljlego 18:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - I was borderline to begin with, the only thing keeping me on was one article. However, I was thinking, and it doesn't seem correct to do so. Off with their heads!
• Partial verification Dick Raper was named European president of Masterfoods Europe in 2001, per Lexis/Nexis, after some time as president of Pedigree Masterfoods, Mars' pet food divison. Not the president of the entire Masterfoods/Mars empire. Thatcher131 20:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, though borderline case. Good name. ProhibitOnions 21:00, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

UPDATE For what its worth, Raper is no longer president of Masterfoods Europe. He seems to have been reassigned to the US office of Mars to be in charge of personnel as of Jan 1, 2004. Don't know if that makes a difference in notability. Thatcher131 02:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• • Further update per the Hoover business directory, CEO of Mars Inc. is John Franklyn Mars, current president is Paul S. Michaels. In fact, nobody but a Mars family member has ever been CEO of the entire company. Current president of Masterfoods Europe is Pierre Laubies and has been since 2004, president of Masterfoods USA is Robert Gambort. I don't question CEO DR (talk • contribs) good faith but his "Bloomberg people directory" is out of date to say the least. I guarantee that the business school library where I work has every $100 business magazine he can think of so if he wants to post specific citations I will be happy to verify them in the real (offline) world.Thatcher131 05:03, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn --Khoikhoi 03:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per my comments above. Although I have commented this is my first vote expression of opinion. Believe this to be a non-notable mid-level executive with a suggestive name. Thatcher131 05:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep now that Thatcher131 has kindly researched this. I think he has borderline notability, so in doubt I'll say keep. It may also be for the best to retain a sane article - as we have - under 'Dick Raper'. --kingboyk 05:15, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but needs work. Newyorktimescrossword 09:34, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Thatcher131 - being 'in charge of personnel' is not notable, do we get the head of HR at every notable company having their own page? (No, we don't) Cursive 21:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.